144 BOOK REVIEWS

Journal of East-West Thought

Jurgen Habermas, The I nclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory.
Cambridge, Mass::MIT Press, 1998. 300Pp+ paperback. ISBN 9-780262581868.

HABERMAS The Inclusion of the other is a collection of essays on a wide range of
topics, including the cognitive dimension of morality, discourse ethics, truth, justice
relation, the normative requirement of law, democracy, the rule of law, nation-state,
cultural inclusion, human rights, cosmopolitanism, and so on. For this reason, rich in
content as the book is, it is very difficult for readers to pin down one central theme
that goes through the whole book. One may also have difficulty in picturing the book
in whole as a deep, mysterious forest as each chapter is an outstanding tree sparkling
with insights and illuminations. Surely, essays of various parts are importantly related.
Yet, their interrelations are not easy to see. For example, in what way is the relation
between a reasonable political concept of justice internally related to the concept of
cosmopolitanism? In what way is the concept of the cognitive content of morality
internally related to the concept of a procedurals concept of democracy? Even with
regard to methodology, various chapters are diverse in style. For example, there is a
genealogical account of the cognitive dimension of morality.
There is analytical analysis of the relation between truth and reasonable political
conception of justice. There is historical account of the origin of human rights, as well.
Surely, genealogical account, analytical analysis and historical narrative do not
belong to the same category of methodology. In spite of all these, the volume at hand
offers a titillating glimpse of Habermas most recent thoughts. Of all topics that are
discussed in the book, cosmopolitanism, or Habermas reconstruction of the Kantian
cosmopolitan project, remains the most intricate one for me.
A full account of Habermas view requires another paper. But The Inclusion of
the other offers us some glimpse. Here is how Habermas reads Kant. In his Perpetual
Peace, Kant puts forth his cosmopolitan project, envisioning a world order that
safeguards perpetual world peace and persons basic cosmopolitan rights. Moreover,
Kantian cosmopolitan order is a juridical one, defined by a kind of cosmopolitan law
based on the principle of human rights. As Habermas reads it, the concept of
cosmopolitan law is a creative one with insights and illusions. The concept indicates a
new category of law, which is crucial and significant to humanity. Meanwhile,
unfortunately, Kants concept of cosmopolitan law does not indicate a path to such a
kind of law. Also revolutionary is that Kantian cosmopolitan order is one in which an
individual person would be not only a citizen of his/her own country, but also a
citizen of the world or a world citizen, enjoying what Kant would call cosmopolitan
rights. As Habermas reads it, the concept of cosmopolitan rights is the key in Kants
cosmopolitan vision. A cosmopolitan order is geared to promote and protect such a
category of rights.
BOOK REVIEWS 145

Journal of East-West Thought

In The Inclusion of the Other, Habermas draws three distinctive ideas from Kant:
(1) the concept of a global order wherein all human beings live as equal, free citizens;
(2) the concept of world law or cosmopolitan law; the concept of a global order
defined by cosmopolitan laws; and (3) the concept of cosmopolitan rights; each
persons status as a cosmopolitan citizen is legal, not merely moral; correspondingly,
each person as a world citizen enjoys certain basic rights or cosmopolitan rights. That
being said, Habermas also finds Kants vision to have significant shortcomings.
Kant feels comfortable with staying in the assumption that a cosmopolitan legal
order can be deduced from a cosmopolitan moral order. In comparison, Habermas
does not see law to be subordinate to morality. Thus, he resists the idea that a
cosmopolitan legal order can be deduced from a cosmopolitan moral order. Moreover,
for Habermas, legitimate global laws must be democratically established. Sticking at
his view in Between Facts and Norms that law does not allow organizational deficit,
Habermas proposes that the world state is replaced with a world order administrated
by a system of world organizations on the top of which is a super-national
organization, the U.N.
Noteworthy, in Habermas reconstruction, the sole role of the United Nations
consists of two parts: to protect human rights and to promote world peace. In other
words, Habermas is more or less with Kant on the thought of what a cosmopolitan
order is about. That being said, Habermas most significant move in his proposal of a
cosmopolitan project is his reconceptualization of Kants concept of cosmopolitan
law. In his proposal, cosmopolitan law would have a binding force not only on
individual citizens, but also on individual governments. He points out that only
through binding on individual governments by cosmopolitan law will the unstable
system of states assert their sovereignty be transformed into a federation with
common institutions (179). In his vision of a constitutionalized world order, a
nations-states sovereignty is no longer absolutely inviolable. For example, a nation-
states sovereignty can be transgressed when human rights are seriously violated, or
worse yet, serious crimes against humanity occur in that nation-state.
Meanwhile, Habermas stubbornly insists that global human rights politics must
be mediated by law and strongly warns against what he calls human rights
fundamentalism. He points out that the way to avoid human rights fundamentalism is
not by renouncing the politics of human rights, but through a cosmopolitan
transformation of the state of nature among states into a legal order (201). That is,
human rights fundamentalism is avoided through the rule of law.
Thus far, thus good. Nonetheless, some serious questions remain. What are
cosmopolitan laws? How can legitimate cosmopolitan laws be established? How can
they be authoritative without a world state? What are the enacting conditions of
cosmopolitan laws? To list just a few. For the sake of focus, let us set aside the issues
146 BOOK REVIEWS

Journal of East-West Thought

of how can cosmopolitan laws be authoritative without a world state and focus only
on issues of how legitimate cosmopolitan laws can be established here. A key point to
consider with Habermas cosmopolitan law is his view that unlike moral rule, law
must be formally established; equally crucial, the formal democratic process of
legislature through which law is legitimately established is the only source of the
legitimacy of law. By this token, cosmopolitan law must be established through
formal process of global democracy that is, cosmopolitan law must be established
formally through the means of formal discussion, voting, and so on. The concept of
formal process of global democracy should be intimidating to some of us. At least I
find myself feel unsettled with its possibility. I cannot help asking this question: Can
cosmopolitan law be established in the same way or similar fashion in which
American laws are established? More exactly, can there be a kind of formal global
democracy that will legitimately establish cosmopolitan law which Habermas
proposes?
For the sake of argument, we can imagine follows: in order for cosmopo-litan
law to be established democratically, similar to how American laws are established,
several conditions must be met: 1) a legitimate world congress consisting of
legitimate representatives of different peoples or all citizens in the world; 2) formal
democratic discussion in the globe; 3) formal democratic voting procedure; 4) fair,
and formal democratic vote in the globe through formal democratic procedure
organized by laws; 5) full democratic participations in the global scale, either by
citizens themselves or by their legitimate representatives. Can these conditions be
met? My misgiving grows if taken into consideration the fact that we are talking
about democracy of a global scale. We cannot take for granted that what can be done
in a national scale can also be done in a global scale. Meanwhile, if there can be no
formal global democracy that will legitimately establish cosmopolitan law which
Habermas proposes, how can such a cosmopolitan law be legitimately established?
We can no longer appeal to God or any divine powers.
We cannot conceive cosmopolitan law which Habermas proposes as any natural
given either. Where is our path? One may think that perhaps, cosmopolitan law can be
established democratically in the same way international laws are democratically
established today. That being said, one cannot take for granted that this is necessarily
the case. Cosmopolitan law is not supposed to be the same as international law. In
addition, whether or not current international laws are truly democratically
established remains an open question. In spite of all these, a cosmopolitan project as
Habermas conceives is a worthy one.
In sum, Habermas The Inclusion of the other is invested with rich thoughts and
overall illuminating. The fact that it has provoked some heated debates on issues
which are dealt in the book speaks for the book itself. Cosmopolitanism is and has
BOOK REVIEWS 147

Journal of East-West Thought

been a heatedly debated topic. This book brings to light crucial issues of our time and
future time.

LEANORA I. LINEBAUGH, The University of Texas at San Antonio.